This essay retraces Paul Ricœur’s references to phenomenological thinking − from his early work on the phenomenology of attention and volition via his methodological considerations of the relation between phenomenology and hermeneutics to his late discussion with Levinas. The paper then focuses onRicœur’s and Levinas’ debate about the limits of the phenomenological notion of the “given” and “givenness” as such with respect to the “phenomenon” ofhuman sensibility vis-a-vis the otherness of the other.

This introduction to the special issue on Judith N. Shklar starts with a brief outline of her early life, her emigration, and the academic circumstances of and influences on her major works. A second part elucidates how the negativism and skepticism that constitute the central tenets of her political thought can best be described as a “phenomenology of the vulnerability of the Other.” Her empha- sis on active historical remembrance, wariness towards communitarianism, and distrust of overly harmonious models of society (...) puts her in the company of recent theories of political dissensus. A final look at the problems arising from her nega- tivism identifies the weak spots in Shklar’s argument, drawing out the difficulty of institutionalizing such a position and the internal incoherence of a perspective that historically is aimed at the twentieth century and theoretically at the seventeenth. (shrink)

This paper raises the question whether language and violence are internally connected. It starts from the experience of violence and from its theoretical interpretation as violence in the context of political forms of life which are challenged by complaints about violence. Such forms of life have to confront this issue because they are supposed to be responsive to claims and demands of others who articulate violence as an experience of violation. Whether a kind of responsive ethos may be based on (...) the suspected inner connection between language and violence is being discussed at the end. (shrink)

This paper raises the question whether language and violence are internally connected. It starts from the experience of violence and from its theoretical interpretation as violence in the context of political forms of life which are challenged by complaints about violence. Such forms of life have to confront this issue because they are supposed to be responsive to claims and demands of others who articulate violence as an experience of violation. Whether a kind of responsive ethos may be based on (...) the suspected inner connection between language and violence is being discussed at the end. (shrink)

In contrast to relying on something (on natural or social processes and on what others are expected to do), trust implies to believe more or less deeply in the other himself – in view of his genuine otherness which escapes our knowledge and calculation of risks. Having faith in others exposes us to severe disappointment in the case that they do not justify our belief, that is, our deep trust (which is faith). This essay examines trust in an historical perspective (...) as a specific dimension of human vulnerability – in contrast to "systemic" trust. (shrink)

This essay critically examines concepts of a non-human history in contrast to Ricur′s thesis that history and memory ultimately rest on human testimony. The concept of testimony refers to the complete vanishing of others who finally disappear without a trace. This disappearing leaves its mark on human memory and history which have to take into account not only relics of past life but also the absence of others without remnants.